Would be to revert the buff to Tsunami. It would substantially reduce the powerlevel of the deck and would be the ultimate humbling moment for everyone that made fun of the tsunami buff. Please blizz make it happen.
I think the deck is mostly fine otherwise, so just reducing that big tsunami blowout moment would make it more manageable tbh. Also I like it more at 8 mana so we can run orb as well.
What would really be funny is if they ânerfedâ the card by having the elemental stats = the mana cost to cast the spell⌠So at 0 mana theyâre 0/0 (and instantly die unless you play the 2 mana 2/3 elemental buffer then they can be 1/1s!) all the way up to 10/10s if played for 10 mana.
Because lateral changes just to make interactions stronger are some new level of dumb design.
The deck is not even good already. Itâs utterly dumb when people wait for thousands of samples per single archetype to respect stats because they donât get how stats work; hundreds of samples for a single archetype are way more than enough to have a good taste of how an archetype works; and I can tell you itâs VERY clear that hsguru meta stats show that several other archetypes are better than that deck.
I have a good idea why the deck is just mediocre; it relies on 1 single card to even have a chance; that means in about half the games you just lose horribly because you had the inevitable bad sequence of draws that didnât get the 1 card.
No it doesnât it has multiple ways of cheating 12/24 worth of stats on turn 5. So right now itâs q deck that gate keeps everyone else. If your deck canât kill a mage Donât bother. Iâm sure it will get nerfed and I hope they will wipe it of the face of the earth. Itâs yhe most brainless deck un the game.
I donât really think thatâs true either. First, the deck has multiple ways to pop off other than the legendary and second, thatâs not really what the stats are saying. Going by Hsguru meta stats, the deck has a 56.6% WR Diamond to legend while sitting at a whopping 32.9% popularity. Every other deck above it has a popularity below 3%. When a deck is meta-warping and extremely popular its winrate goes down because its most common matchup is a mirror and every other deck is just trying to target it.
The stats clearly show the deck is broken. I just think it isnât broken by a wide margin and a tsunami buff revert would not only fix it, but it would also be pretty funny.
Chapuzo you do the mistake to respect only the gigantic sample sizes of the default meta pages filters; thatâs not necessary at all and especially in the first few days of a new major patch; itâs perfectly valid statistically and backed by mainstream statistics to respect a few hundred samples for a single archetype (I would go lower even (albeit no less than ~80) but we currently have easily hundreds anyway).
And if you go by the hundreds of samples per single archetype which are very legitimate results statistically you see that the deck is barely even in the top 10 in most brackets.
At the top of legend is relatively confidently not even top 10.
I am not saying the other deckâs stats donât matter, that doesnât have anything to do with the point I made 
D0nkey shows its like 51 winrate at top 1k legend woth 30% of the meta. It hilarious how broken this deck is. Iâd say revert tsunami and nerf the tourist to 6 mana.
Thatâs⌠Really low and borderline unplayable stat wise. 2% less win rate (basically any nerf) and it wouldnât even be a viable deck.
Itâs the 30% play rate thatâs the problem (along with the game experience of a turn 4 or 5 tsunami) thatâs the entire issue. The stats you just quoted show that itâs popular, not broken.
51 winrate at the top 1k legend with that playlate is not low rotfl are you kidding me or you just another mage shill trying desperately that garbage to notvget nerfed soon xD
When a deck has such a high popularity and dominates WR compared to everything else, its statistical WR will go down because its most common matchup is against itself. The deck is still broken. There are only 2 other decks with a higher WR in top1000 legend according to donkey: painlock and pirate DH, simply because they have a slightly decent matchup against BSM. BSM is the meta warping deck here.
A 51% win rate is low. Thatâs 1% away from not being a viable deck for climbing at top legend. Any nerf would delete the deck from the meta up there entirely.
Yes, I understand this. Even with that effect taken into account, the deck doesnât have an egregious win rate. It has a problematic popularity.
I think the only good thing is that you can get under it somewhat with a super aggro deck. Other than that the deck is obliterating the field so saying it isnât broken is an understatement for sure. I do agree itâll be fine with just a touch to tsunami for the most part
Itâs not really obliterating the field though. The decks that were good prior to the mini set generally are still fine. Pain lock and pirate DH were good picks before, and they destroy BSM.
The frost buttons DK seems to do fine against it.
As does pirate and big shaman.
Druid can out perform it for slow decks.
The popularity of the deck is crazy high, itâs not some unbeatable juggernaut.
Doing anything to tsunami would utterly delete the deck. Pushing Skyla back a turn or two would be a reasonable adjustment considering there are a variety of options available to you for a positive win rate against big spell mage. (Also skylaâs mulligan stats are actually insane)
Nerf, nerf, nerf away. Iâll take the dust please and thanks!
Is it at top legend when you go against tons of mirrors and the rest of the meta is running counters for it???
I call it meta meta defining, this isnt some boring crap that is on the single digits play rates.
The whole top legend revolves around this deck , and a 1 mana nerf to the tourist wont make it unplayable.
It will scare away the âtouristsâ playing the deck, problem is Blizzard might not stop there and go for the kill with multiple nerfs.
You guys have to seriously learn some basics on stats. The d0nkey default sample size filter is just BAD for the early hours of a major patch. There is absolutely no reason to wait only for thousands upon thousands of samples (that can take you back days or even weeks to see the deeper picture); hundreds of samples for a single archetype are more than enough for a first rough picture; statistical significance is always better to be higher but it becomes a poison if it makes you completely DELETE from the list entire archetypes with very respectable samples sizes of hundreds upon hundreds of games per single archetype.
And you treat as if 40% was enough for a deck to play most of the time against itself.
For that to be true you have to reach atleast around 75%.
And even then most sites exclude the mirror for obvious reasons.
As for playrate :
It would not explode into ridiculous numbers if blizzard did let playrate numbers alone.
This only happens because blizzard itself created that demmand by nerfing things based on popularity.
Anything with a 30% play rate is meta defining even if itâs tier 4.
If plague DK was the most popular deck at a 30% play rate you would be dumb to run anything thatâs bad to plague DK. It doesnât make plague DK good, but it does define the meta.
So yes, big spell mage is currently meta defining via play rate. Itâs also a strong deck. Itâs not looking like the most broken thing hearthstone has ever seen, or even close to that. We have had plenty decks in the past that had zero to one bad matchups. Big spell mage isnât that.
Itâs going to be nerfed if the popularity stays this high because Blizz isnât going to let a single deck warp the meta around it this much, but itâs not doing so because the deck is unbeatable. Itâs relatively straightforward to do so.